Recently there was a discussion on LinkedIn in response to a post I made about the language of alcohol use in harm reduction circles.
It quickly spun madly off in all directions.
One direction included an attempt to shame me, as someone who studies this stuff, for providing misinformation.
I am not sure what I said that was deemed misinformation but I think the complaints went something like:
1) Alcohol is not a food it is a drug. It is a depressant and is studied as such.
2) Softening the language of alcohol is “normalizing” alcohol, something done by the drink industry over the past century.
3) To say otherwise is irresponsible.
Now I’m not one of those people who normally credentials myself by saying “I’m a historian so let me tell you” but… well, I am a historian and if someone presents a misleading call out to history I am professionally obliged to correct it.
So here we go:
1) Historically alcohol was a food. Biologically it functions as food. Our livers convert it to acetaldehyde, and then convert it to acetic acid. That is a food for cells. Our primate ancestors developed the capacity to metabolize alcohol in fermented fruit, and DNA evidence indicates that this was in response to periods of resource scarcity. This is why most of us can metabolize it.
(to be sure acetaldehyde is the chemical that causes nasty side effects of drinking, and has also been deemed carcinogenic, although things like at what point exposure ticks over to toxicity is not clear).
I’m not saying it should be consumed as a food but just suggesting that to those who think it is just another drug, there is more to it.
It is also a depressant, but such categories (food/depressant) are not mutually exclusive.
2) Alcohol has been instrumental in developing human society, in bringing people together, and facilitating community cohesion. This may be credited to the endorphins that are released when drinking, endorphins being responsible for all sorts of good things like happiness, sense of well-being, connectedness, and pain relief.
In other words, drinking is an entirely normal part of human existence, and foundational to the creation of society.
(Note that this is a process that took place before some cultures emerged that banned or did not consume alcohol—such as Muslim communities or some Indigenous peoples. Do not take this as a suggestion that these folks are less evolved).
Consequently, to argue that the “normalization” of alcohol is an action of the liquor industry over the last hundred years has no basis in history. That seems more about advancing a “Big Alcohol” conspiracy theory than historical accuracy.
And:
3) To argue that alcohol is abnormal, and only problematic, is to encourage stigmatization and shame on people who may be doing something reasonable and moderate. It will also reinforce stigma on people who may have found that their drinking has become out of control and would like to look for help.
I’d call that irresponsible.
Leave a Reply